I think this is the issue you're having. People can make sound and unsound decisions with all the data in the world.
The data isn't "scripture."
What information should we use to make these sorts of decisions aside from the available data?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I think this is the issue you're having. People can make sound and unsound decisions with all the data in the world.
The data isn't "scripture."
Testimonies from people who have suffered side effects and my dad may be one of those. But who can prove it? If someone does have health problem shortly after taking the vaccine, how do you know whether it was due to the vax or just bad luck?So what do you know that informs your decision not to get vaxxed?
We all use our own experience to evaluate the world. I said from the beginning I was speaking generally, based on my experience literally speaking with unvaccinated people and listening to their reasons. Maybe there's a whole group of undiscovered unvaccinated people who have fabulous, evidence-based reasons for the lack of vaccination. I haven't seen it.
I keep repeating it because you keep making the same baseless claim and not giving any evidence for it.
If you want me to stop asking you to substantiate your claims, stop making them?
I didn't say you implied that. Other people did.
{quote] The government has the ability to tell us what we want to hear and see and censoring is one of many ways to do it. I don't know where you live (since it depends on where we are from) but in the US it's heavily one-sided.
Ditto. Please stop making claims you can't support.
What information, specifically, are you waiting for? When the FDA provides full approval, will that change your mind? Or will that be another example of government simply telling us "what we want to hear?"
I plan to lose no sleep over it either. You seemed to be taking personal offense at my line of questioning, with accusations that I'm "cornering" you.
I suspect that if and when herd immunity were actually reached, you'd see "provaxxers" care much less about antivaxxer silliness. Currently we're not there and a disturbing number of people are not getting vaccinated because of misinformation they've been told, so that becomes more of a concern.
I never said I believe what we are told about covid mortality either, BTW.Okay. But my point is not everyone falls under his line of thinking. People Do think clearly, know the facts and evidence, and forever Logical reason they decide not to vaccinate.
(@Wildswanderer) He is just one out of millions that have an opinion.
They aren't good reasons because the chances of those things happening to a person who gets vaccinated are extremely small, particularly when compared with the risk of serious medical complications if a person actually gets COVID. That, for the second or third time, is why the CDC and WHO and similar organizations continue to recommend vaccination to the public after having evaluated the incidences of the side effects you mentioned.
What information should we use to make these sorts of decisions aside from the available data?
Yes. It becomes a problem when used to judge others harshly.
What else do you want that you will accept?
Yes. It sure does. What's wrong with the statement?
That you will accept.
Data isn't scripture. People can make decisions with "divine" factual data that are contrary to the majority.
No need to curse then.
Cornering meaning you're asking for reasons to throw me off because I can't give any you accept.
It's a logical fallacy. That's all that means-an observation based on the conversation.
Yeah. Which makes provaxxers a bit hypocritical in their logic.
One because all the people getting COVID, they say, are unvaccinated people... so why care about them then?
Why care about the dying if they are all unvaccinated?
I didn't say not to use the data already given so I'm not sure what you're trying to say.
They are good reasons "and" the chances are rare.
They continue to recommend vaccination "and" they are looking into these rare life threatening side affects.
They are taking these rare side affects very very seriously instead of pushing them under the rug. I can't blame the unvaccinated who do the same.
That's the best route to take. Worked then, it can work now.
At least until covid mutates into a less harmful virus.
I never said I believe what we are told about covid mortality either, BTW.
OK great, so then we should use the available data to inform our decisions. Great. Then we should get vaccinated.
(I read) what I mean is, how do you (or provaxxer) solve where to put the unvaccinated so we won't potentially infect other unvaccinated people?
How do you deal with the unvaccinated? (Or what people call antivaxxers)?
I've never got a direct answer. It's one thing to complain about antivaxxers but it's another to form some sort of solution or its just making noise as a group.
The first part, yes. Vaccinated and unvaccinated person alike have the available data and make decisions congruent to their situation and that data.
The second part, it depends on the person. Should-no.... not everyone agrees on my criteria morality so I don't impose it on others. It would be beneficial for many to, though. For example, someone working in the hospital would benefit. People traveling would as so those working around lots of people may feel it helps. Working with children would ideally be required. I think teachers need to take their TB shots anyway, so. Those with compromised immune systems would benefit.... or just getting it because they feel like they will catch COVID and spread it.
It highly depends on how much a person believes they are at risk of catching it asymptomatic and symptomatic to take that choice into consideration.
I see no issues with it.
I’ve seen the adverse effects and I’m glad you got vaccinated and did what was best for yourself. I’m waiting and may not ever need it. Time will tell.Again, that's simply inaccurate. You can look up the stats on side effects yourself.
Wow. None of that here-at least on the street level since I don't drive and haven't gone out the area in near 10 years by public transport. My co-worker believes in the 5G myth but I don't know much about it. She also believes the end of the world is happening from the book of revelations so.
Wow. I never heard of those. I never took vaccines other than the required ones in elementary school. So I have no inherent issues with them in their purpose.
I honestly don't know. I stay away from all of that. I would have never known if not for my being told, the mask mandate, and RF.
There are unvaccinated that are not antivaxxers and made intelligent sound decisions not to vaccinate based on whatever reasoning and facts (not misinformation) they came across. While a minority, that doesn't mean its not true.
People be people. Selfish and oftentimes idiotic, I’m afraidBut no, I don't get myself involved in all of that. Which is good and I think that would be for other people's well-being... and I do not believe it should be justified by "we are thinking of other people not just ourselves." That's a mantra I see on television on lot and it spread like wildfire.
Because I expect the numbers to be inflated by the power hungry, not under reported.That's fascinating, then why do you believe the chances of dying from COVID are low?
No it doesn’t. Your immune system can combat many things. Many people young and old relied on their immune system alone. Again when the first strain broke out, many people recovered. That’s looking less and less likely with more infectious and severe strains. That likelihood will only increase the longer we allow it toThat’s the best prevention for Covid because it puts you in a low risk situation.